Aren’t VDI and Desktop Virtualization the Same?
Often, when the decibel level of a conventional wisdom reaches a feverish pitch, it can be wise
to seek the opposite of what the convention suggests. Examples of this wisdom happen all the
time in our daily lives. When the masses refinanced into 3‐ or 5‐year ARMs, the smart ones
held their 30‐year fixed mortgages. Investors follow similar behaviors. The irrationally
exuberant moved conservative‐but‐reliable securities into high‐risk tech stocks and
learned how fast the bubble bursts when “everyone else is doing it too.”

In the past few years, those same behaviors have been infiltrating our industry. For us, the
topic isn’t mortgages or investments. Rather, it’s the approaches we use in delivering
desktops to users.

“VDI is the answer, and the answer is VDI!” is a common theme you’ll hear as you attend IT
conferences or read industry magazines. Yet the exuberance that surrounds VDI technology
belies the fact that VDI is but one approach to desktop delivery. VDI is also only one of
many options to benefit from desktop virtualization. Unfortunately, as too many find out
far too late, VDI might not necessarily be the solution to your users’ needs.

There’s a Difference?
If this series’ title confuses you, don’t fret. You’re not alone. Thanks in part to an impressive
volume from marketers and aficionados alike, VDI has quickly elevated from niche topic to
“something you absolutely must do.” Although VDI technology is undeniably exciting, VDI
and desktop virtualization aren’t necessarily the same thing. In reality, VDI is but one of
many ways in which desktops can be virtualized.

VDI represents an approach to desktop delivery, just like manually installing a user’s
desktop via DVD media. VDI’s primary difference stems from its centralization. VDI
deployments centralize desktops into the data center, enabling IT to act as a service
provider. From this location, IT gains operational efficiencies over the traditional physical
desktop delivery approach, such as the ability to manage just a single copy of Windows,
having all others operate as clones from that template original.

Yet many who are considering VDI don’t realize that it presents IT gains as well as losses.
Users tend to lose in the deal as well. VDI’s approach functions exceptionally well for task
workers who consume static application sets. It fits lab environments that require rapid
deployment and turnaround. It can also be a perfect solution for users with light
application sets who never leave the confines of their local high‐speed LAN. VDI’s
undeniable charisma, however, reveals its true limitations the moment those workers
move outside the brick‐and‐mortar. Attempt to push Adobe Flash, video, or voice over
WANs, and users quickly discover the use cases where VDI fails to meet their needs.

Highlighting this contrast is the goal of this series. In it, we’ll explore what desktop
virtualization really aims to accomplish. You’ll also learn about virtualization approaches
that may provide a better fit than VDI for your situation. Focusing first on the needs of the
user and second on the improvements offered by virtualization to IT automation, you’ll see
the big failures traditional VDI introduces to the social contract between users and IT. On
this journey, you’ll come to understand how one particular approach—hybrid desktop
virtualization—combines the best of the others to merge IT’s centralization desires with
users’ real‐world requirements.

Finding Balance Between Centralization and Flexibility
The guiding notion behind desktop virtualization is IT’s desire to optimize asset
management. Look back not that far in the past and you’ll find all kinds of terrificallyineffective
examples of our early management practices:
• Walking around with DVDs to install software
• Possessing zero configuration control and even less update compliance
awareness
• Employing manual processes in applying operating systems (OSs) to desktops
• Boasting no or limited ability to transfer user state between devices—laptop to
desktop, desktop to conference room PC, others—while synchronizing changes
among all devices

Although automation toolsets indeed brought some centralized control to these activities,
implementing the toolsets began an industry obsession with strategies that favor control
above all else. At fault is the very real human nature to seek solutions that make one’s life
easier. Nearly any IT administrator will tell you, “Everything would be much easier if we
could better lock down our desktops.”

Yet although control and lock down absolutely fit IT’s goal of making their job easier, this
heavy‐handed approach hinders the users’ experience. Ever worked in a fanatically‐lockeddown
environment where every personalization element is defined for you, every
application is nailed down tight, and every data access is check pointed by multiple security
controls? The experience isn’t pleasant. If this environment embodies your administrative
mindset, take off your Domain Admin gloves some day and try working as a regular user
for a while. You won’t like it either.

That’s why the emerging IT conventional wisdom recognizes that a single‐minded control
focus will never achieve desired goals. The reality is that users will always find a way
around. Increase password complexity, and users will write them down on sticky notes.
Take away their personalization, and they’ll construct elaborate business justifications why
personalization must remain. Move their desktop into the data center, and they’ll just
switch to their (far less trustworthy) home laptop to finish their work.
The Essentials Series: VDI or Desktop Virtualization: What’s Right for You? Greg Shields

All this said, centralization is important for management, security, and simply keeping
people connected in appropriate ways. For the right desktop virtualization for your
environment, you need to find the best balance of centralized management and control
while maintaining the best possible user experience and mobility.